SECRET
5.
(c)
we are not, however, prepared actually to take on or be responsible for the administrative
arrangements necessary, whether they are concerned with insurance, safety or anything else. And nor are the Ministry of Defence,
who are involved solely via HMS Tamar and as Advisers to this Department (see subparagraph (b) above).
At the end of your letter of 15 March you may that if certain conditions are met you "would have no objection to the visit". If by this you mean that you have no ́enthusiasm for it either, I sympathise. While the "Ottó
Hahn" is a merchant ship, it was designed for research rather than profit.i It may shortly be taken out of operation and,' if it is, it is unlikely to be replaced.
It is, I think, for you therefore to decide whether, in
the light of, paragraph 2 above and what follows, you have
イ enough enthusiasm for the visit to set up the arrangements that will make it possible. If you have, so much the hatter: if you have not, we are sorry but we do not weep.
4.
Pris
We have the following specific comments on the matters raised in your letter:
(a)
We appreciate the arguments of paragraph 5 of your letter but, on the MOD's advice, maintain the view that a special safety scheme is necessary to cover the "Otto Hahn's visit (though we are certainly not insisting on any "completely new government organization" to handle it. We can see no need for one). The MOD have advised that it would be very wrong to regard the USS Savannah's visits to Hong Kong some 7-10 years ago (when, they understand, no special safety organization was set up) as a precedent for the "Otto Hahn's visit. Whatever contingency plans you had to cover the USS Savannah's visits are therefore not suitable
as they stand to cover the visit now contemplated As to the NUSAFE orders, these are exclusively
drawn un for the Brith "} ?
I'
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.